The Pedagogy of Social Science Research Methods Textbooks Scoping study research report

June 2018

Sarah Lewthwaite and Michelle M. Holmes, University of Southampton

2

Contents

Acknowledgements 3

Executive Summary 4

Introduction 5

Methods Pedagogy 7

Methodology 8

Findings 14

Explicit Pedagogy 16

In-Text Features 17

Pedagogic Themes 18

Active Learning 18

Learning by Doing / Experiential Learning 19

Reflexivity 20

Pedagogic Hooks 21

Student-Centred Pedagogy 22

Characters 23

Building Difficulty 23

Conclusions 25

Key Findings for Future Research 25

References 28

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this report are the authors’ and do not necessarily

reflect those of the Society for Research into Higher Education

3

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of our funders, the Society for

Research into Higher Education. As Principle Investigator, I (Sarah Lewthwaite) would

like to thank Melanie Nind (University of Southampton), whose support and insight

enabled this work at the earliest stage, along with my referees Mike Wallace (University

of Cardiff) and David Martin (University of Southampton). In particular, Professor Nind's

work with Rose Wiles and Daniel Kilburn in the first phase of the pedagogy of

methodological learning project (2013-2014) supplied a fundament from which this

research could move forward. This study has also benefited greatly from the support and

mentoring of Patrick Brindle (City University, London), and formative conversations with

Lianghou Fan (University of Southampton). We are indebted to Damon Burg, who

contributed as a Research Associate to the later stages of literature review and data

collection. We would also like to thank readers and critical friends to the project, Corrado

Matta (Stockholm University) and, once again, Melanie Nind (University of Southampton).

Executive Summary

There is a lack of pedagogic culture underpinning the teaching and learning of research

methods within the social sciences. Contemporary research explores both teaching and

learning practices and the pedagogical challenges of research methods teaching. As part

of this, however, it is necessary to also consider the role of pedagogic resources,

specifically research methods textbooks. This study aimed to explore the pedagogical

devices employed in leading research methods textbooks, identify the explicit

pedagogies embodied within the textbooks, and examine how textbooks foster support

for experiential aspects of methods teaching and learning.

The research comprises a literature review of 30 leading social science research

methods textbooks. Our sample recognises a spread of qualitative, quantitative and

mixed-methods books by single authors or small authorial teams. Books were drawn

from all social science disciplines and identified on the basis of: i) authorship by

pedagogic leaders ii) citation as a signifier of impact, iii) revision through multiple

editions, iv) current course collections and reading lists v) sustained sales and 'best-

seller' status. Textbooks were reviewed according to an iteratively-developed analytic

template.

In our data collection and analysis, an array in-text pedagogical devices were observed

to connect learners to research and spur active learning. Experiential learning is gestured

to, through voicing of authorial experience and connection to real-world cases and data.

Functionally, we find the pedagogies of textbooks are used as a vehicle to effect the

pedagogical content knowledge that is characteristic of methodological teaching. The

importance of engaging multiple perspectives to model different approaches to methods,

and expose the ‘messy reality’ of methods practices is also pertinent. For example,

Strauss & Corbin’s (2015) use of ‘insider insights’ from guest authors in the field, or

Field’s (2017) use of personas to voice questions and insights. The use of standpoints

and situated perspectives are deployed alongside reflexive tasks and activities.

Many authors are explicit about their pedagogies, discussing how their book might be

read or applied by different audiences, gesturing to how research, teaching and authorial

roles blur and how they have engaged students’ learning experiences to develop their

materials across editions. There is a significant discourse within the field that holds that

many methods cannot be taught in theory, expressing the tension between the abstract

and the applied signature pedagogies of research methods. In short, the pedagogies of

learning-by-doing, and associated experiential pedagogies are deemed essential. Our

findings suggest that authors work creatively to address this perceived divide.

As research councils seek to answer the demands of the knowledge economy, pedagogy

can be occluded by discourses of training and capacity building. In response, we sought

to spur pedagogic dialogue. We argue for sustained attention to the pedagogies of

research methods, through research that seeks to develop and enrich the pedagogical

culture of this emerging field.

4

5

Introduction

To date, there is a consensus that research methods teaching lacks the pedagogic

culture necessary to ensure excellent teaching and learning (Earley, 2014; Wagner et al.,

2011, Kilburn et al., 2014). This is manifest in a lack of dialogue that can be observed in

cross-citation, a developed research literature, networks, forums, debate and robust

discourse on the values and practices of research method teaching and learning. At

present, teachers of methods cannot draw upon an established pedagogic research

literature when developing their methods teaching (Earley, 2014). What there is can be

characterised as largely based upon small scale studies based on a particular course or

cohort, rather than cross-case empirical research and analysis (Nind, Kilburn & Luff,

2015). Whilst these have value, significant gaps remain in understanding how methods

expertise are developed in higher education. This is troubling given that the ability to

undertake and evaluate research are foundational within the social sciences (Ryan et al.,

2014).

To engage this concern, the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) funded

the Pedagogy of Methodological Learning project1 (2015-2018) at the National Centre for

Research Methods. This major study explored the distinctive pedagogical challenges

faced by methods teachers and learners (see Lewthwaite and Nind, 2016, Nind and

Lewthwaite, 2018). This scoping study builds upon this research, addressing an

important new dimension - moving from teaching and learning practices to consider the

important role of pedagogic resources, specifically, social science research methods

textbooks, in the development of methods competencies.

Methods textbooks deserve particular attention. They are amongst the most highly cited

in the social sciences (Green, 2016) and constitute a resilient and influential area of

academic publishing. Both within and outside the classroom, methods textbooks are near

totemic resources for learners. Proponents argue textbooks document the very

underpinnings of the disciplines (Keith and Elder, 2005). However, the pedagogies of

these books remain largely unexamined.

In this report, we offer an analysis of the pedagogies embedded in a substantial selection

of leading textbooks designed for postgraduate students and researchers. We do this to

help identify the pedagogical approaches and strategies employed, and further, to

stimulate the pedagogic dialogue and pedagogical culture that is much needed for

methodological learning (Nind, Kilburn & Luff, 2016).

Our findings afford new insights into cutting-edge textbook pedagogies that address the

mix of procedural knowledge, theoretical understanding and technical know-how that is

unique to building methodological expertise (Kilburn et al, 2014). We elucidate the

pedagogies that are both implicit and explicit within our textbook sample. We discuss

1 http://pedagogy.ncrm.ac.uk

6

distinct pedagogical approaches articulated by different textbooks by outlining modal

distinctions inclusive of manuals for independent learning, to course-based, and hybrid

forms. We also recognise the diverse pedagogical approaches that are demonstrated by

methods textbooks to manage the challenges of methodological pluralism,

interdisciplinarity and the readers' methodological intension.

To begin, we observe that the current research literature scrutinising social science

research methods textbooks is scarce. This reflects not only the state of research into

research methods teaching but also the current state of textbook research in higher

education as a whole (Kernohan & Rolfe, 2017). Within this small literature2, pedagogy is

rarely discussed. Where it does occur – usually within disciplinary teaching journals –

methods textbook pedagogy is often found within challenging, deficit framing discourses.

Methods textbooks are criticised on various grounds: as being static (Hood 2006), lacking

nuance (Hood, 2006; Dixon and Quirk, 2017), being prone to error (Hood, 2006;

Schweingruber and Wohlstein, 2005), conveying (only) procedural knowledge (Dixon and

Quirk, 2017), presenting knowledge as uncontested (Hood, 2006), lacking in criticality

(Hood, 2006) being subject to commercial influences (Kendell, 1999), and being out of

step with academic research (Best & Schweingruber, 2003; Puentes & Gougherty, 2013,

Dixon and Quirk, 2014, 2017). Within this largely negative context, pedagogy (in the form

of disciplinary teaching knowledge and classroom practice) has been held to be in

conflict with both innovation (Kendell, 1999) and disciplinary content (Best &

Schweingruber, 2003). The methods textbook itself is identified as a source of conflict in

the classroom. Hood (2006) writes critically, asserting that as textbooks ‘require expertise

on a wide range of material that is almost always broader than the expertise of the

author’ – they will contain ‘at least some material that is clearly in error’ (Hood, 2006:

207). For Hood, the failure of social science research methods textbooks represents a

moment to ‘grapple with misleading and inaccurate statements’, ‘myths’ and ‘mainstream

folklore’ (p. 207).

Aside from methods, wider writing on textbook pedagogy in the social sciences expands

on these criticisms. For example, in economics, Paxton (2007) argues that the literary

practices of textbooks tend to be single-voiced, which gives the impression of consensus

in the discipline and encourages rote-learning and plagiarism.

Taken together, the recent textbook methods literature mirrors issues identified by

textbook research from the 1980s (see Sheldon, 1988 for a comprehensive review),

suggesting there is still more to do. Pedagogic textbook research has flourished in other

disciplines and at other educational stages (for example, in mathematics [see Fan et al.,

2018], economics, in secondary education research and elsewhere). Yet pedagogic

2 Due to the small literature, the literature review for this report included a high-sensitivity search of peer-reviewed literature (2000-2017) and subsequent search of cross- and received citation to facilitate discovery.

7

research into methodology textbooks remains scarce. This, accompanied by the largely

negative framing literature and the lack of representation of pedagogy, is a concern

because, for pedagogic culture to thrive, ideas must be shared, debated and subject to

empirical research (Wagner at al. 2011). There is evidence of debate regarding the

status and content of textbooks within disciplines (see the exchanges between

Schweingruber, 2005, and Keith and Ender 2005, concerning the latter’s review of

sociology textbooks and the ‘disciplinary core’ published in 2004). This has not extended

in any meaningful way to pedagogy – or, more precisely – the pedagogical content

knowledge (Shulman, 1984) that might constitute robust resources for building

methodological competencies. The pedagogy of social science research methods

textbooks requires exploration, and this scoping study offers a first step to engaging this

research gap with a view to stimulating the pedagogical culture of research methods in

textbook pedagogy.

Methods Pedagogy

Beyond a textbook focus, recent deep thematic reviews of the (albeit limited) research

methods teaching literature (Kilburn, Nind and Wiles, 2014) suggest three pedagogic

approaches that characterise methods teaching with relevance to this study. The first

concerns how teachers connect learners with research, seeking to make the research

process visible by actively engaging leaners. These ‘active learning’ approaches deploy

tasks that require hands-on engagement and teaching methods ‘which get students

actively involved’ as opposed to relying on didactic, transmissive modes of teaching

(Keyser, 2000: p35). Secondly, learning by doing represents an established approach in

which students are provided with first-hand experience of undertaking research in real-

world contexts, or using authentic empirical data. This integrates the immersive and

experiential qualities that build tacit knowledge and have been deemed essential to a

research methods education. Proponents argue such experiential learning is essential

and that methods cannot be taught in abstraction (Hammersley, 2012). Lastly, reflexivity

represents a third tenant in the methods teaching literature. This denotes how teachers

involve students in reflection upon their own learning and facilitate the examination of

positionality, standpoints and multiple-perspectives, alongside scrutiny of learner

experience and research practice (Kilburn, Nind and Wiles, 2014). Notably, these

reflective practices exist in opposition to practices that rely solely on procedural

knowledge or technical activity (Schon, 1983).

Active learning, learning-by-doing/experiential learning and reflexivity then represent

three distinct, but overlapping streams of core methods pedagogy. Knowledge of these

three strands informed our subsequent research design.

8

Methodology

Nind et al. (2016) identify pedagogy as having 'three key, interrelated dimensions' (Nind,

2016, p.10). The first, 'pedagogy as specified', relates to assumptions about appropriate

modes of teaching and content, focussing on an educator’s intent. The second,

'pedagogy as enacted' details how pedagogical approaches are articulated, and this has

been the focus of our project. The final, third, dimension deals with 'pedagogy as

experienced'. This project deals with textbook content – and the ‘pedagogy as specified’

– that the textbook embodies.

Our rationale also anticipated pedagogic aspects that are characteristic of the research

methods teaching literature would also be found in our textbook sample, namely that

pedagogies of active learning, learning by doing/experiential learning and reflexivity

would be articulated in a given textbook sample. To this end, this study proposed three

inter-related research questions:

RQ1: What pedagogical orientations, communication styles, technical devices and

supplementary online resources and activities are employed in leading research methods

textbooks?

RQ2: How explicit are the pedagogies embodied within the methods textbooks to guide

the reader’s learning?

RQ3: How do these textbooks foster or incorporate support for experiential aspects of

methods teaching and learning?

These were proposed with a view to:

- Adding to understanding about how methods textbooks inform the teaching and

learning of methods in higher education;

- Providing an educational analysis of implicit and explicit pedagogies in methods

textbook authorship;

- Examining commonalities and differences in the pedagogies at play within methods

textbooks.

For this study, ‘textbooks’ were taken to included handbooks, course books, source

books, and manuals, functioning within Bierman’s definition (2006: 1) ‘both as a

mechanism for initial learning and as a reference for the future’. These had to be

methodologically focused, excluding, for example, introductory disciplinary textbooks or

those focused on study skills.

The research comprises a review of 30 leading social science research methods

textbooks. Our sampling strategy sought to recognise a spread of qualitative, quantitative

methods and mixed-methods works by single authors, or small authorial teams that could

supply a coherent pedagogic voice across a volume. Edited collections were deemed out

9

of the scope of this review. E-Books, open textbooks and e-courses were also excluded

due to the differing pedagogy.

The review sought textbooks pertaining to social science disciplines as delineated by the

ESRC (2018)3. No limit was placed on publication dates and a long list was identified on

the basis of:

i) Authorship by ‘pedagogic leaders’ (Lucas and Claxton 2013) in the field. These

are researcher-educators who share their distinct and developed pedagogy.

ii) Citation as a signifier of research impact (see Green, 2016; Martin-Martin et al.,

2014). Citations over 20,000 were considered as strong.

iii) Revision of a text through multiple (>3) editions, as an indication of sustained

pedagogic development, and a genealogy within methods learning.

iv) Evidence of student use/expert recommendation: ascertained through listings

in current course collections and reading lists for leading social science

methods summer schools.

v) Sustained sales / 'best-seller' status: through sales data from book sellers and

publishers.

We recognise, amongst these, that the notion of pedagogic leadership is contentious,

and that our selected authors would not necessarily define themselves as ‘pedagogical

leaders’. Nonetheless, we hold that the writing and publishing practices of these authors

‘set the cultural tone’ (Lucas and Claxton, 2013: 15) for textbook methods learning and

development. As ‘expertise develops slowly and can be characterised by a large

integrated knowledge base’ (Shraw, 2006, p. 259) these pedagogic leaders are identified

as senior academics and scholars with significant experience of methods publishing and

of teaching advanced research methods at a postgraduate level. This follows work by

Lewthwaite & Nind (2016) which also noted such expertise are marked by ‘peer-

recommendation (through the National Centre for Research Methods’ teaching networks

and expert advisory group)’ (Lewthwaite & Nind, 2016, p. 416), alongside the publication

of ground-breaking and influential methods textbooks, and published reflections on

pedagogy for methods teaching. Many hold leading positions within international

methods societies, journals and as trans-national visiting academics. Selected authors

have also been involved in pedagogic research into the teaching of advanced research

methods (see Lewthwaite & Nind, 2016). In this way, we characterise these authors as

‘pedagogic leaders’, for the purposes of this review.

3 These comprise demography and social statistics, methods and computing; development studies, human geography, environmental planning; economics, management and business studies; education, social anthropology, linguistics; law, economic and social history; politics, international relations; psychology; sociology; science and technologies studies; social policy and social work.

10

Using these criteria and associated resources, a long list of 324 titles was produced. The

initial search was refined to identify books that were strong across multiple criteria, with

exceptions maintained for important outliers. The refined list identified 87 citations by 58

lead authors. From here, final shortlisting required qualitative judgements about the

relative value of these criteria. For example, taken alone, citation is a blunt metric. It

shows how a source is applied in published research, but citation does not indicate the

extent to which a textbook is read, or applied in student work4. Thus, for inclusion

purposes, pedagogic leadership and edition number were weighted over citation count in

some cases, as we took these to be more indicative of pedagogic interest for the

purposes of this study.5

Table 1 shows the 30 textbooks reviewed and the criteria for their selection (marked with

an asterisk).

4 Green’s (2016) analysis of the top ten cited social science methodology textbooks, that was relevant to this study. However this citation data, whilst initially useful, could not be replicated; firstly due to the dynamics of citation metrics (which accrue and alter daily) and observed differences in the way in which Google Scholar measures citation counts for multiple editions, which can be uneven in cases where there are changes to authorship, for example with Miles, Huberman and Saldaña (2015). 5 Our analysis has centred on the content of the book. In doing so, we have focussed on ‘pedagogy as

specified’ (Nind, Curtin & Hall, 2016). We note two necessary limitations – first that there can be a tendency to evoke a singular ‘author’ without reference to the editorial, publisher, student and reader influence on the text (as this wider context is beyond the scope of this report). Second, that our (evidenced) reading – cannot substitute for learner experience (‘pedagogy as experienced’, Nind, Curtin & Hall, 2016). Reading is an active endeavour, that may be mediated by peers, teachers and others.

11

Table 1: Textbooks reviewed in this study.

Textbook Reference

Cit

ati

on

s

Ed

itio

ns

Read

ing

lists

Sale

s

Ped

ag

og

ic

lead

ers

Babbie, E. (2012). The Practice of Social Research. Cengage Learning.

International Edition. 13th Edition. * * *

Bazeley, P. & Jackson, K. (2013) Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo.

SAGE. 2nd Edition. * *

Bryman, A. (2015). Social research methods. Oxford University Press.

5th Edition.

* * * * *

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. SAGE. 2nd Edition. * * *

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of Qualitative Research:

Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory.

Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. 4th Edition.

* * *

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and

mixed methods approaches. SAGE. 4th Edition.

* * * *

Field, A. (2013 / 2017). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics.

SAGE. 4th and 5th Editions. * * * *

Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research. SAGE. 5th

Edition.

* * * * *

Fox, J. (2015). Applied Regression Analysis, and General Linear

Models. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. 3rd Edition. * *

Gelman, A. and Hill, J. (2007). Data Analysis Using Regression and

Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press. 1st Edition.

* *

Greene, W. H. (2011). Econometric analysis. Pearson Education. 7th

Edition.

* *

Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E.

and Tourangeau, R. (2009). Survey Methodology. Hoboken, New

Jersey: Wiley. 2nd Edition.

*

Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (2007) Ethnography: Principles in

practice. London: Routledge. 3rd Edition. *

Kline, R. B. (2015) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation

Modeling. Guilford Press. 4th Edition.

* * *

12

Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its

Methodology. SAGE, Thousand Oaks. 3rd Edition.

* * *

Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2014). Focus groups: A practical guide

for applied research. SAGE. 5th Edition.

* * * *

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 75). SAGE.

1st Edition.

* *

Lofland, J., Snow, D., Anderson, L. and Lofland, L.H. (2004) Analyzing

Social Settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis (4th

edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. 4th Edition.

* *

Mason, J. (2002/2017). Qualitative researching. SAGE. 2nd and 3rd

Edition. *

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data

analysis: A methods sourcebook. SAGE. 3rd Edition.

* * * *

Morgan, S. L., & Winship, C. (2014). Counterfactuals and causal

inference. Cambridge University Press. 2nd Edition. * *

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative evaluation and research methods.

SAGE. 4th Edition.

* *

Robson, C. & McCartan, C. (2015) Real World Research. Wiley. 4th

Edition. * *

Salkind, N. J. (2016). Statistics for people who (think they) hate

statistics. SAGE. 6th Edition. * * *

Scott, J. (2017). Social network analysis. SAGE. 4th Edition. * * * *

Silver, C., & Lewins, A. (2014) Using Software in Qualitative Research.

SAGE. 2nd Edition. * *

Silverman, D. (2015). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for

analyzing talk, text and interaction. SAGE. 5th Edition. * *

Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics.

Pearson International. 6th Edition.

* * *

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods

research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the

social and behavioral sciences. SAGE. 1st Edition.

* *

Yin, R. K. (2013/2018). Case study research: Design and methods.

SAGE. 5th and 6th Editions.

* * * *

13

All textbooks were reviewed according to an iteratively developed analytic template. This

included identifying pedagogical devices, such as the use of examples, case studies, and

exercises. Explicit pedagogy was highlighted through discussion of pedagogy by the

authors, and implicit pedagogical devices were examined, for example, in the use of

'pedagogical hooks' (Lewthwaite and Nind, 2016) such as the use of authentic data.

Quotations from the text and select images were collected as evidence of pedagogy and

examples of pedagogical devices. All data was input into NVivo (version 11). Each

analytic template was coded and grouped into higher-level categories, enabling an in-

depth analysis to capture key elements and concepts within the data. The initial coding

was conducted by one researcher, with refinement and grouping into higher-level

categories by two researchers. Additionally, a subset of six textbooks were reviewed a

second time, in-depth by one researcher, to generate further insight and supply additional

points of reference for theory building. This included two quantitative (Field, 2013/2017;

Groves et al., 2009); two qualitative (Miles, Huberman and Saldaña, 2014; Mason,

2012/2017) and two mixed-methods textbooks (Creswell, 2013; Bryman, 2015), selected

on the basis of distinctive pedagogy and a spread of methods.

14

Findings

Our selection criteria returned a cross-section of 30 leading contemporary social science

textbooks, covering a range of methods. This process resulted in a varied group of texts,

incorporating course books and sourcebooks, books that instruct and others that gesture

to possibility. A reflexive account of the breadth of authorial approach we encountered is

articulated by Charmaz (2014: xiiiv) ‘Although some authors provide methodological

maps to follow, I raise questions and outline strategies to indicate possible routes to

take’.

We found textbooks and textbook pedagogy to constitute a dynamic, changing field.

Three texts (Field, 2017; Mason, 2017 and Yin, 2018) were released in a new edition in

the course of data collection6. All these new editions reflected the need to maintain up to

date / state of the art content (Groves, 2009) and changes in mediating technologies

(Field, 2017). Changes in data and the growth of distinct fields were also seen, for

example the addition of Bayesian statistics in Field (2017) and eResearch in Bryman

(2016), or a new title – as in the case of Yin’s, (2018) ‘Case Study Research and

Applications’. Contrary to research that positions textbooks as a detached, static and

inflexible form, authors reflexively expressed shifts in the discourse of methods that is

(importantly) pedagogically informed. As Saldaña states: ‘Books on research methods

can no longer require; they can only recommend’ (Miles, Huberman & Saldaña, 2014, p.

xvii).

Within the sample, we found some texts to be pedagogically more singular (for example

Greene, 2011; Kline, 2015; Tabachnick and Fidell, 2013) and others more multi-facetted

in their presentation (for example, Field, 2017; Miles, Huberman and Saldaña, 2014, as

will be discussed). As a result, some authors’ works are represented more strongly than

others within our results and discussion. Textbooks deploying a singular pedagogic vision

may usefully express one aspect of pedagogic content knowledge for a specific audience

in a given context (Shulman, 1984). However, for the purposes of this study, more

diverse and expressive pedagogy is discussed in more detail.

In terms of pedagogical orientation, we found the vast majority of texts represent a hybrid

form, functioning between course books and sourcebooks. With course books

organised according to the structure of the course delivering content sequentially, with a

view to being facilitated by a teacher in class and knowledge being accrued over the

course of reading from beginning to end. Whilst sourcebooks are texts orientated to

independent learning and self-learning, where chapters may standalone and gesture

backwards and forwards to content in other chapters, anticipating that they will be dipped

into.

6 The latest two editions were reviewed for these books, the edition is specified in the text for these cases.

15

Some authors explicitly discuss the relationship between the textbook and formal (in-

class) research methods teaching. Gelman and Hill (2007); Groves et al., (2009); and

Krippendorff, (2013) state explicitly that their books have originated from teaching, from

authorial experiences as educators, as well as developing course notes and exercises

into a textbook. Eight authors (Corbin and Strauss, Fox, 2015; Gelman and Hill, 2007;

Greene, 2011; Groves et al., 2009; Kline, 2015, Krippendorff, 2013; Salkind, 2016) state

that their textbook could be used within educational (classroom) settings. A subset of

texts (e.g. Fox, 2015; Groves et al., 2009; and Kline 2015) address teachers directly. For

example, Fox (2015) frames his exercises for educators:

…like all real-data analysis – these exercises are fundamentally open-ended. It is

therefore important for instructors to set aside time to discuss data-analytic

exercises in class, both before and after students tackle them. (Fox, 2015, p.xxii)

Over the course of many editions, authors refer to the various ways in which the

pedagogy of a volume is iterated. This may be formal, through a publishers’ peer-review

process or in the form of teacher and student feedback (Babbie, 2012; Groves et al.,

2009); ‘informal survey’ (Miles, Huberman and Saldaña, 2014, p. xxii); 'asking for

collegial advice' (Miles, Huberman and Saldaña, 2014, p.xxii); and reader/learner

correspondence (Field, 2017); or through teaching:

As always, the process of teaching from the book taught us a great deal

(Miles, Huberman and Saldaña, 2014, p.xxii)

Several authors use frequently asked questions (FAQs) within the text, or include a

chapter of FAQs (Corbin and Strauss, 2015; Flick, 2014; Groves et al., 2009; Krueger

and Casey, 2014; Patton, 2015; Silverman, 2015). Authors explicitly state that these

questions are raised by students or commonly asked by researchers.

Notably, these authorial steps do no constitute systematic pedagogic research, however,

they do express a proximity to teaching and student interest that is not recognised in

research about methods textbooks. They also gesture to the ways in which feedback and

use are seen to lead to text improvement.

Authors address multiple audiences in different ways and recognise that any one reader

may use the text in a number of different ways, for various purposes as they gain

expertise and experience (Field, 2017; Bryman, 2016). To explore this, we begin with an

examination of explicit pedagogy. Our subsequent discussion of findings are structured

as outlined in Table 2.

16

Table 2: Findings

Explicit Pedagogy

Explicit pedagogy refers to authorial direct address, whereby pedagogic reasoning,

teaching and learning strategies are voiced to the reader. These occur frequently in cover

notes, prefaces to new editions or through direct addresses to specific audiences.

Starting points

Many books include a guide for how to use the book and these function in multiple ways:

positioning the book, setting the pedagogic tone and relating the reader to the content for

the first time. In introductory sections titled 'Guide to the book' (Bryman, 2015) 'The

nature of the book' (Miles, Huberman and Saldaña, 2014), 'How to use this book' (Field,

2017) amongst others we noted the sophisticated ways in which pedagogic issues such

as content and approaches to difficulty are outlined for different audiences giving access

to the pedagogic decision making. Many texts function effectively as multi-facetted

pedagogic objects, and within these hybrid textbooks, this faceting of content through

different modes of presentation is made very explicit. Modes for delivery include styling

these sections as a readers' 'Frequently Asked Questions' - 'What background

knowledge do I need' (Field, 2017), 'why use this book?' (Bryman, 2015), an invitation

and imagined dialogue: 'You might ask, what does the journey entail? Where do I start?

How do I proceed? Which obstacles lie ahead?' (Charmaz, 2014, p.1), or more simply in

a preface or introduction.

Defining Audience

Authors define their audience explicitly by stating who the book is for and by developing

the foundations from which the book will build. Themes here include multidisciplinarity -

for example, drawing attention to use of examples from across social sciences and

stating 'relevant discussions' for other disciplines such as Health (see Miles, Huberman

and Saldaña, 2014). Within quantitative textbooks necessary pre-requisite/prior

knowledge (statistical or technical) is often outlined (Greene, 2011; Gelman & Hill, 2007;

Field, 2017) allowing authors to make assumptions regarding prior knowledge and pitch

difficulty accordingly. Educational level (undergraduate, post graduate or post-doc) is

frequently stated. Competency for those outside formal education is also framed by

some authors, who recognise (for example) a 'beginning researcher', or 'staff specialists

Explicit Pedagogy In-Text Features Pedagogic Themes

• Starting points

• Defining audience

• Dualism in theory and practice

• Generic book features

• Methods-specific pedagogical devices

• Active learning,

• Learning by doing/experiential learning

• Reflexivity

• Pedagogic Hooks

• Student-centred pedagogy

17

and managers'. Reference is more often (or simultaneously) given to the nature of the

educational or research task at hand. Bryman (2015) identifies first, undergraduates in

social sciences, who will take a methods course, and second, undergraduates and

postgraduates who are required to conduct a research project. Bryman (2015) explicitly

highlights content accordingly: 'Chapter 4 has been written specifically for students doing

research projects' (p.xxv). Whilst Bryman does not style these as exclusive categories,

notably, books often address 'the project' or 'the course'. As we have seen, this can be

for the teacher/reader. But the role of the book in support of courses is more readily

attuned to student/reader perspectives, for example including repeated 'suggestions for

using the book in qualitative research methods courses' (Bryman, 2015 p.5).

Dualism in theory and practice

Babbie (2012), Groves et al., (2009) and Silverman (2015) explicitly discuss the dualism

between theory and practice early in their texts; authors highlighted that other books

within their subject areas either presented extensive theory in abstract terms or detailed,

step-by-step instructions on how to conduct research, de-emphasising the theories

underpinning research methods. Many authors (Charmaz, 2014; Flick, 2014; Groves et

al., 2009, Lincoln and Guba, 1985; Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009; Yin, 2018) rejected the

discourse of a ‘cook-book’ or ‘recipe book’ for research, preferring to provide a solid

foundation on both the theoretical principles of research and how these principles are

reflected in research method techniques; bridging the gap between theory and practice7 .

However, some authors (Bazeley and Jackson, 2013; Creswell, 2013; Krueger and

Casey, 2014; Salkind, 2016; Silver and Lewins, 2014) explicitly distil content to a set of

core ideas for readers to planning to conduct research.

Why isn’t this theory stuff and more in Statistics for People Who (Think They) Hate

Statistics? Simple. Right now, you don’t need it. It’s not that I don’t think it’s

important. Rather, at this point in time in your studies, I want to offer you material

at a level I think you can understand and learn with some reasonable amount of

effort, whilst at the same time not be scared off from taking additional courses in

the future. I (and your professor) want you to succeed (Salkind, 2016, p.xxiv)

In-Text Features

There are number of book features which can be considered generic to textbook

pedagogy. Authors include detailed contents pages, meaningful titling, glossaries,

appendices, and author and subject indexes. Most authors have similar chapter

organisation including overviews and summaries. Chapters are preceded with an outline

that highlights the upcoming themes, and are concluded with a concise list of main points

central to the topic, providing a chapter summary and useful review. All facilitate learning.

7 Textbook authors are included in parenthesis as pertinent examples, not an exhaustive list.

18

As one would expect, many textbooks used figures, tables, and visualisations throughout

the text to articulate their methodological content (Babbie, 2012; Field, 2017; Miles,

Huberman and Saldaña, 2014; Salkind, 2016; Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009). This adds

visual appeal, with the text broken up with tables, graphs, figures, photographs, and flow

charts, as well as offering different routes to learning, through visual and multiple

representation and metaphor. These access points gesture to inclusive practices (Nind

and Lewthwaite, 2018) that have particular resonance in quantitative methods as readers

connect with methodological logic. Authors also deploy textboxes. These boxes can

present major issues, summarise material, give practical advice, or provide additional

explanation. They allow authors to structure the text in a way for easy access for the

reader.

Sidebars are boxed items of interest that supplement the text with examples and

extended quotations from knowledgeable qualitative theorists and practitioners.

They are a way of highlighting experts' insights, case study exemplars,

supplementary readings, and additional resources (Patton, 2015, p.xxi).

In light of this, we note that authors use a range of pedagogical devices specific to social

science research methods. Amongst these, a key pedagogic device is the use of real

world research examples and data from varying disciplines, providing an idea of the

potential for research methods as well as for readers to develop an understanding of how

research is conducted and analysed. Authors also include insights from researchers from

their prior experience, and advice for researchers through practical hints and tips.

Several authors provide practical research resources, such as checklists, step-by-step

guides, and research process templates (Bazeley and Jackson, 2013; Corbin and

Strauss, 2015; Krueger and Casey, 2014; Mason, 2002; Salkind, 2016; Silver and

Lewins, 2014). Books also include a number of activities for readers, such as practical

exercises with data and end of chapter review questions.

Pedagogic Themes

In Kilburn et al.’s (2014) review of the literature, research into methods pedagogy is

found to gravitate around three major pedagogic streams – active learning (and learning

by doing), experiential learning, and reflexivity. We find evidence of these in our sample,

articulated in sophisticated and diverse ways.

Active Learning

There is significant discourse within the field that research methods cannot be taught in

theory alone. This identifies the pedagogies that are unique to research methods –

extending from theoretical understanding to procedural knowledge and technical skills.

Active learning pedagogies are in evidence in textbook form, with authors having the

difficulty of integrating this approach into a textbook. Acknowledging this, authors

approach the textbook with an active approach and focus the book on conducting

research. Many books include research exercises, varying from to writing a research

19

proposal (Babbie, 2012) to analysis of real-world data (Scott, 2017). Silverman (2015)

highlights the importance of this approach:

To be effective, a textbook should offer an active learning experience... Thus I

provide many exercises, linked to the surrounding text. These exercises often

involve the reader in the gathering and/or analysing data. My aim is that the users

of this book will learn some basic skills in generating researchable problems and

analysing qualitative data (Silverman, 2015, p.xxiii).

Acknowledging the difficulty of facilitating an active approach in book form, many authors

use an active learning approach deploying varied in-text features, and inclusion of review

questions and other activities. Teddlie and Tashakkori (2009) provide questions and

exercises for readers to engage with the subject covered. This is different from getting

readers to undertake mixed-methods research or analysis, but helps to get students

engaged with the topic and understand the chapter content.

Learning by Doing / Experiential Learning

The pedagogies of learning-by-doing, and associated experiential pedagogies have been

deemed essential to a robust methods education (Hammersley). However, facilitating

experiential learning remotely is a challenge for authors. To this end, books include

authors' authentic personal accounts, incorporating rich narratives of experience as both

researchers and teachers to provide readers with experiential reference points (see:

Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña, 2014; Patton, 2015; Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009).

Silverman (2015) acknowledges that authors' experiences and assumptions are

embedded within the writing of a comprehensive textbook on research methods. Authors

share their research stories with readers, embodying and modelling the acquisition of

methodological competencies:

Those early focus groups opened up a new territory for us. We were stunned by

what we learned by gathering a group of people, asking questions, and listening.

We learned about the topics, and we learned how to conduct focus groups. We

made plenty of mistakes. (Krueger and Casey, 2014, p.xviii)

Additionally, authors include others' experiences with research methods, this emphasises

multiple perspectives (Corbin and Strauss, 2015; Krueger and Casey, 2014; Lincoln and

Guba, 1985; Patton, 2015; Salkind, 2016; Silverman, 2015). On one hand, this

challenges notions of conformity and consensus in ways that foster reflexivity. On the

other, this introduces a strong experiential pedagogic dynamic. For example, Bryman

(2015) includes 'supervisor tip boxes' and 'student experience boxes'. The aim of these

boxes is to include authentic experiences in methods, to help readers gain insight into

how a method works in practice. Several other qualitative authors also include researcher

insights, Corbin and Strauss (2015), Miles, Huberman and Saldaña (2014), and Patton

(2015). These comments regarding research are more anecdotal advice based on

authors' and researchers' experiential knowledge. This gestures to difficulties and issues

within research from backstage accounts of research experience, rather than presenting

20

the 'perfect' front-stage accounts of research published in academic papers. Many

authors also offered 'research tips' with guidance for research tasks, field-work, step-by-

step directions, and technical tips. On occasion these in-text pedagogical devices expose

readers to the authors' experiential learning.

We learned what makes a good focus group question. We developed different

ways of analysing the data, based on the purpose of the study. We got dirt under

our fingernails – and we keep getting them dirty. Now we want to share what

we’ve learnt with you, (Krueger and Casey, 2014, p.xviii).

Mason (2002) uses questions to structure the book, as a way to engage the reader. The

questions are a prompt for researchers to answers themselves as part of the research

process, with Mason providing around the topic discussion rather than a ‘correct’ answer.

Mason (2002) explains:

I did not produce a book laden with rich descriptions of qualitative research

experience. Although such descriptions are interesting and important for other

purposes, I felt they were not the best way to stimulate and support the active

engagement of the researcher around their own set of research questions, that I

think is so vital to the conduct of good quality qualitative research. Instead, I

focused the book on ‘difficult questions’ that qualitative researchers need to ask

themselves, and to resolve, in the process and practice of doing their research

(Mason, 2002, p.vii).

Reflexivity

Many textbooks instil reflexivity, by encouraging reflection, demonstrating its value and

modelling its place as essential to methodological competence. Activities centred on

reflection include directions to use research journaling alongside textbook activities

(Miles, Huberman & Saldaña, 2014; Yin, 2018) or use of questions that require the

reader to reflect (Yin, 2018; Miles, Huberman & Saldaña, 2014; Field, 2017). More subtly,

some (predominantly qualitative) texts use positionality and standpoints, as a thread

across the text, expressed through vignettes of personal experience or an authorial

standpoint that is explicit about the positionality of the text, relative to others and the

wider methodological landscape (Charmaz, 2014; Lincoln and Guba, 1984; Silverman,

2015). In the case of Miles, Huberman and Saldaña (2014) reflexivity is baked-in, with

contents including 'Our Orientation', as well as the deliberate use of 'we', and, when

'opinions seem to diverge' the text specifies 'whose belief is being discussed' (xviii).

Deploying authorial voice in the first, second or third person (and alternating between

these) draws attention to the ways in which research is situated and necessitates critical

positionality; key issues for reflexive methodological learning (Kilburn et al., 2014).

In this way, many author biographies work to express expertise, an simultaneously model

routes into methods and methodology, drawing out the positionality of the authors relative

to one another – highlighting multiple perspectives – and creating a space for reader

21

reflection that actively works against the reification of a monolithic/positivistic authorial

voice (see Miles, Huberman and Saldaña, 2014).

Other implicit features of the physical text for reader reflection and engagement include

the use of wide margins and white space that invites note-taking, a feature of some larger

format textbooks. For example: Yin (2018) and Miles, Huberman and Saldaña (2014).

Pedagogic Hooks

Authors use a number of ‘pedagogic hooks’ (Lewthwaite and Nind, 2016), to connect

students to research methods, hooking them in and getting them interested in the topic –

strategies observed in research in the methods classroom (Lewthwaite and Nind, 2016).

These hooks can involve research ideas, data or methods, but fundamentally seek to

connect learners to research ‘so that they might see or know research in engaging ways’

(Lewthwaite and Nind, 2016, p. 421).

Real World Research and Authentic Data

One of the most common hooks is the inclusion of real world research to demonstrate the

principles of a method, it’s application, illustrate major issues, and highlight the method’s

potential (see: Gelman and Hill, 2007; Greene, 2011; Groves et al., 2009; Hammersley

and Atkinson, 2007; Lofland et al., 2004; Morgan and Winship, 2014). Fox describes

selecting real world datasets that add 'intrinsic interest' and 'embody a variety of

characteristics' (Fox, 2015 p.xxii). Field also identifies the role of data in adding interest,

having ‘trawled the world for examples of research on really fascinating topics’ (Field,

2017, p. xxi).

Authors also show research in use. For example Bryman (2016) includes 'Research in

the news' textboxes, with examples of research in the media, highlighting the potential

role research has on informing and influencing the public. Yin (2013) also punctuates his

text with brief case studies ‘deliberately drawing from different academic and professional

fields’. He continues:

Each box contains one or more concrete examples of published case studies, to

illustrate the points made in the text. The citations will increase your access to

existing and (often) exemplary case studies. (Yin, 2013, p.xxi).

Humour

Field (2017), Patton (2015) and Salkind (2016) also use techniques to make research

methods fun for readers and learners, acknowledging the importance of engaging

readers who may feel anxious about learning a complex topic such as research method

(see for example, the substantial literature on perceived ‘statistical anxiety’). Field (2017)

and Salkind (2016) include humorous anecdotes and examples, in order to make the

topic personable and approachable to readers. These two books in particular focus on

quantitative content and take a visual approach to presenting the complex content. There

22

is a visual depiction of research process throughout the book, with illustrations and

figures to explicate both simple and more complex ideas.

The Sixth Edition of Neil J Salkind’s best-selling Statistics for People Who (Think

They) Hate Statistics promises to ease student anxiety around an often

intimidating subject with a humorous, personable, and informative approach.

(Salkind, 2016, cover notes).

Narrative

Patton (2015) and Field (2017) include storytelling amongst a battery of hooks to engage

readers, using both auto-biographical narratives that serve to embody the methods,

alongside stories, cartoons, fictional characters and personas to develop narrative

threads. Examples include Patton’s ‘rumination’ “written in a voice and style more

empathetic and engaging than traditional textbook style” (2015: 429). Field (2017)

includes his school reports in his preface, and bookends his chapters with ‘My life story’.

He explains his rationale:

I strongly believe that people appreciate the human touch, and so I inject a

lot of my own personality and sense of humour (and lack of) into my

Discovering Statistics Using...' books (Field, 2017, p.xvi)

Gelman and Hill (2007) and Krueger and Casey (2014) also use story-telling early on to

demonstrate the application of statistical methods to engage readers the potential of the

methods in question.

Student-Centred Pedagogy

Student-centred learning is compatible with active and experiential learning, insofar as

learners are actively engaged and constructing meanings for themselves, in this case, in

interaction with the text. Starting points for this pedagogic approach are the experiences,

interests and needs of methods learners.

Authors include a number of implicit and explicit student-centred pedagogical devices to

encourage self-learning within their readers. For example, we have already discussed the

ways in which pedagogic hooks are used, how content is facetted for different learners,

and how content is iteratively developed with student/reader input. In addition, we notice

several authors acknowledge that readers are also learners over a life course. They

understand the reader/student/beginner researcher within a learning journey. They

highlight that although a textbook provides details on the process and techniques for

research and that the book provides learning opportunities for students, their learning

belongs to them (Charmaz, 2014; Fox, 2015; Kline, 2015; Miles, Huberman, and

Saldaña, 2014). The provision of pedagogic devices, such as exercises, reflection, and

examples, combines both the content knowledge and reader involvement, aiding the

readers' self-learning and their learning journey. The metaphor of the journey is used

knowingly by Charmaz:

23

This book takes you through a journey of constructing grounded theory by

traversing basic grounded theory steps. The book will provide a path, expand your

vistas, quicken your pace, and point out obstacles and opportunities along the

way. We can share the journey but the adventure is yours. (Charmaz, 2014, p.xiv).

Further, several authors (Corbin and Strauss, 2015; Field, 2017; Miles, Huberman and

Saldaña, 2014; Salkind, 2016) deploy holistic, student-centred approaches to the reader

that recognise the emotional toll of methods learning. A number of authors include a

direct address to the reader (Field, 2017; Kline, 2015; Krippendorff, 2013; Mason, 2002;

Patton, 2015). Miles, Huberman and Saldaña entreat readers not to ‘despair’ (2015, p.6)/

‘I will speak to you (through my author’s voice) as one researcher to another, not as a

statistician to the quantitatively naïve.’ states Kline (2015, p. 2) ‘this is one journey that

you do not have to make alone’ (p. 3). Such expressions of fellowship empathise with

readers, acknowledging the emotional difficulty associated with learning research

methods. In the same vein, Corbin and Strauss seek to ‘save others some of the

struggles I faced’ (2015, p.82). We note that within more contemporary edition, texts

increasingly acknowledge that readers may feel anxious, desperate, or struggle with their

learning journey (see Bryman, 2015; Salkind, 2016; Field, 2017; Corbin and Strauss,

2015). This trend echoes an increasing research literature that holistically engages

student experiences of research and the PhD as an embodied, situated experience (see

Devine and Hunter, 2017, as one example). This permeates both qualitative and

quantitative texts.

Characters

One particularly striking pedagogic device is the use of fictional characters to illustrate

various pedagogic points. Patton (2015) introduces ‘Halcom’ (pronounced ‘How Come’),

using this character to provide the fundamental philosophical underpinnings for

qualitative research, in each chapter. Field (2017) also deploys characters (11 in total) to

pedagogic ends. Some act as cyphers for particular tasks (Smart Alex poses questions,

Oditi highlights online video, Labcoat Leni denotes ‘real data, from a real research study

to analyse’) proffering familiar pedagogic resources in a more graphic form. Some

characters model and organise difficulty. Brian Haemorrhage ‘knows nothing’ but ‘flaunts

his newly found knowledge’ at the end of each chapter. Jane Superbrain ‘appears to tell

you advanced things that are tangential to the main text’ (Field, 2017, p.xxii). Cramming

Sam summarises key points for students revising for exams. In this respect, characters

present familiar learner tropes: personas and scenarios that readers may choose to

identify with at different times, promoting engagement with the text and learner agency in

the selection of learning material.

Building Difficulty

Authors also use a number of approaches to deal with difficult or complex content. Some

state that they include content for audiences of varying knowledge and expertise

(Creswell, 2013; Flick, 2014; Greene, 2011; Groves et al., 2009; Miles, Huberman and

24

Saldaña, 2014; Robson and McCartan, 2015). Yin (2013) ensures the book is adaptable

to audiences of differing competence. There are notes and tutorials which provide further

details and reading to the main content, there are also research tips which allow readers

to dip in and out of the text for their learning needs. Other authors are more explicit about

the varying degrees of difficulty in the content, for example Fox (2015) marks chapters,

sections, and exercises with an asterisk for more challenging content and exercises.

Field (2017) gives a difficulty rating to particular activities, coding each section with an

icon – from ‘introductory’ to ‘incinerate your brain’ (Field, 2017, p.xxii).

In-text features such as textboxes are provided for additional explanation of a concept,

with more detail than in the core text (Babbie, 2012; Bryman, 2015; Charmaz, 2014;

Field, 2017; Patton, 2015; Robson and McCartan, 2015; Yin, 2018). This may be used by

readers who do not understand a concept, or by readers who wish to understand further

about a topic.

Thinking deeply boxes encourage you to consider an area in greater depth; either

analysing a topic or issue further, or explaining the ins and outs of a current

debate or significant discussion that has occurred between researchers. This

feature introduces you to some of the complexities involved in using social

research methods. (Bryman, 2015, p.xxx).

Varied techniques for sequencing content and providing scaffolding for the reader on

their learning journey are presented (Babbie, 2012; Bryman, 2015; Field, 2017; Gelman

and Hill, 2007; Greene, 2011). Many books are organised in a way in which sections are

broken down into key elements and build on one another to enhance on student learning

(Corbin and Strauss, 2015; Miles, Huberman and Saldaña, 2014; Salkind, 2016).

My reorganizing decisions […] are based on pedagogical knowledge of how most

university graduate students learn and on how I personally prefer to teach:

progressing in a highly organized, systematic way, one building block at a time,

towards a spiralled, cumulate synthesis (Miles, Huberman and Saldaña, 2014,

p.xviii)

However, some authors acknowledge that readers may use the book as a reference

source and use techniques to direct the reader. These books use a number of in-text

features, such as a detailed content pages, and chapter overviews which allows readers

to easily discover elements that relate to their learning aims. Foreshadowing is used

within the text (Bryman, 2015; Morgan and Winship, 2014; Scott, 2017; Tabachnick and

Fidell, 2013) providing readers with ideas and concepts and then highlighting the

chapters where this will be discussed further on in the book in more detail. Taken

together, these rhetorical and pedagogical devices gesture to both the explicit and

implicit ways in which authors make content accessible to learners in ways that meet

their learning needs.

25

Conclusions

This scoping research marks an important first engagement with the pedagogy of social

science research methods textbooks.

Our findings afford new insights into cutting edge textbook pedagogies that address the

mix of procedural knowledge, theoretical understanding and technical know-how that is

arguably unique to building methodological expertise. Pedagogies are both implicit and

explicit within our sample. Authors use prefaces and direct addresses to the reader to

identify the function and audience of the book. Authors also discuss distinct pedagogical

approaches – use within curriculums and articulate the dualism between theory and

practice in their texts. There are a number of in-text features, generic to textbook

pedagogy, which demonstrate diverse pedagogical approaches by authors. Many

authors approach the textbook with a learning-by-doing pedagogic approach and focus

the book on conducting research. Acknowledging the difficulty of facilitating a learning-

by-doing approach in book form, many authors deploy active learning through the

inclusion of review questions, and other activities. The textbooks also include experiential

learning content, relating authors’ own experiences as researchers, or including others’

experiences with research methods. Pedagogic hooks are reflexively used to engage

learners with research methods, incorporating examples of real world research, research

in practice and the media, as well as using illustrations and humour to make research

methods personable. Authors also use an array of devices to encourage self-learning

and facilitate access to the text for multiple forms of use. In this key respect, we find that

textbooks are multi-facetted pedagogic objects that address a varied readership in a

dynamic way.

Within this research, we were particularly interested in the ways in which the pedagogies

of social science research methods were articulated with the textbook. Arguably, this

moves discussion from Pedagogic Content Knowledge (Shulman, 1984) to Technological

Pedagogic Content Knowledge (TPCK) (Koehler and Mishra, 2009). Pedagogical

Content Knowledge refers to teacher understanding of what constitutes effective

pedagogy for specific methodological content. TPCK evokes pedagogic content

knowledge that is technologically mediated – requiring a ‘complex interaction between

three bodies of knowledge; content, pedagogy, and technology’. Traditionally TPCK has

focused on digital mediation of learning – however, this also offers a useful tool for

thinking about methods textbook pedagogy.

Key Findings for Future Research

Going forward, there is scope for social science textbook pedagogy to be greatly

developed as a field of study. Several vistas for scholarship present themselves.

Many texts offer extra-text features online. The extra-text was beyond the scope of this

study. However, the scope for teaching with and through data online – and the

26

preponderance of linked data sets, self-test questions, answers to questions within the

book, and demonstration videos (see Bryman, 2015; Creswell, 2013; Field, 2017; Flick,

2014; Robson and McCartan 2015) show that companion websites are an increasingly

common addition to the traditional physical textbook. We note an emergent influence of

(or resonance with) the informal pedagogies of the Web. We have observed the influence

of Web text traditions – such as the use of Frequently Asked Questions which gesture to

the dialogic discourses of the Web across a substantial number of books (see

‘Experiential Learning’ p20). At the same time, the challenge of recognising reader

diversity parallels informal (Web) pedagogies, where resources must engage and serve

multiple interests. Here, learning can be characterised as ‘open-ended, non-threatening,

enjoyable and explorative’ (Boekaerts and Minnaert 1999, p. 536, cited in Tan, 2013,

p.464). This accords with the growing evidence of student-centred, holistic textbook

approaches and the use of humour found in our study.

The informal pedagogies of the Web can deliver personalised and self-regulated learning

by promoting autonomy in learners. In textbooks we see this through the use of explicit

pedagogy (whereby the learner can reflexively engaged with their own approach to

content) and the faceting of content to accommodate different levels of difficulty, detail,

different routes to content, multiple voices and perspectives etc. In these ways, many

textbooks use increasingly sophisticated pedagogic methods to spur nuanced learner

engagement for independent learning, handing ‘learning decisions’ (Downes, 2010) to

the reader. Such pedagogies gesture to the ways in which the textbook represents a

hybriding-form, not only in terms of relationships to digital materials (the eLearning

course, digital resources, accompanying websites etc.) but also as a locus for developing

pedagogy, influenced by and influencing other pedagogic spheres.

Our methodology has meant that certain types of text are more likely to be reviewed than

others. Hence, new fields of research, niche methods or methods texts that have not yet

gained traction across the disciplines are not represented. These constitute important

horizons for pedagogical innovation, as new methods iterate pedagogy in new directions.

The role of methodological journals, handbooks and major edited collections as

pedagogically diverse bastions of methodological learning also bear examination.

Engagement with research methods textbooks by discipline (as has begun within

sociology), and/or according to specific methodological genres (digital methods,

interpretive methods, ethnographic methods) may also help further the development of

the pedagogic content knowledge (Shulman, 1984) that characterises the teaching of

specific methods and how these relate to disciplinary tradition. Given the dynamic nature

of social science research methods (and the changing nature of textbooks and

27

publishing8) future research considering how methodology and pedagogy develop and

iterate across editions would benefit from exploration.

Additionally, we note the complex and overlapping relationships between authors,

publishers, readers, teachers and reviewers in the co-ordination (and construction) of

texts. Future research should explore how these active agents shape textbooks to give

nuance to understandings of authorship as part of wider contextual and socio-cultural

scrutiny that consider the politics of methods textbooks from post-colonial and indigenous

perspectives.

This scoping study has considered methods textbooks as stand-alone artefacts that

'enact' pedagogy, according to the triumvirate of approaches to pedagogic research

established by Nind et al. (2017), that is: pedagogy as specified, pedagogy as enacted,

and pedagogy as experienced. This has value. Outside the physical (or notional)

container of the textbook two clear lines of enquiry can be pursued, beyond the limits of

this study. First, engaging authors themselves in research about the pedagogic

development of research methods textbooks (and how pedagogic discourse in this space

is 'specified'). Second, seeking to understand how these books are read (pedagogy as it

is 'experienced') and the subsequent impact on methods understanding, competencies

and broader capacity. This is aspect is particularly important, given that learner

perspectives within the wider literature remain scarce.

8 See the Open Textbook movement and new research by the UK Open Textbook Project

http://ukopentextbooks.org

28

References

Babbie, E. (2012/11). The Practice of Social Research. USA: Cengage Learning. International Edition.

Bazeley, P. & Jackson, K. (2013). Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo. London: SAGE.

Best, D. & Schweingruber, D. (2003). First words: Do Sociologies Actually Use the Terms in Introductory

Textbooks’ Glossaries? American Sociologist. 34 (3), 97-106.

Boekaerts, M. & Minnaert, A. (1999). Self-Regulation with Respect to Informal Learning. International

Journal of Educational Research. 31(6), 533-544.

Bryman, A. (2015). Social research methods. UK: Oxford University Press.

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. London: SAGE.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for

Developing Grounded Theory. California: SAGE.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.

California: SAGE.

Devine, K. & Hunter, K. H. (2017). PhD student emotional exhaustion: the role of supporting supervision

and self-presentation behaviours. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 54(4). 335-344. doi:

10.1080/14703297.2016.1174143.

Downes, S. (2010). New Technology Supporting Informal Learning. Journal of Emerging Technologies in

Web Intelligence. 2(1): 27-33.

Earley, M. (2014). A synthesis of the literature on research methods education, Teaching in Higher

Education, 19 (3), 242–253. doi:10.1080/13562517.2013.860105

Economic and Social Research Council. (2018). Discipline classifications. Retrieved from:

http://www.esrc.ac.uk/funding/guidance-for-applicants/is-my-research-suitable-for-esrc-funding/discipline-

classifications/

Fan, L., Trouche, L., Chunxia Q., Rezat., S. and Visnovska, J. (Eds) (2018) Research on Mathematics

textbooks and teachers’ resources. Advances and Issues. Springer.

Field, A. (2013 / 2017). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. London: SAGE.

Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research. London: SAGE.

Fox, J. (2015). Applied Regression Analysis, and General Linear Models. California: SAGE.

Hammersley, M. (2012) Is it possible to teach social research methods well today? Discussion paper

presented at HEA Social Sciences Teaching and Learning Summit: Teaching Research Methods,

University of Warwick, 21–22 June 2012.

Gelman, A. & Hill, J. (2007). Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

29

Green, E. (2016). What are the most-cited publications in the social sciences (according to Google

Scholar)? LSE Impact of Social Sciences. Retrieved from:

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2016/05/12/what-are-the-most-cited-publications-in-the-social-

sciences-according-to-google-scholar/

Greene, W. H. (2011). Econometric analysis. Essex: Pearson Education.

Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E. and Tourangeau, R. (2009).

Survey Methodology. New Jersey: Wiley.

Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice. London: Routledge.

Hood J. (2006). Teaching against the text: the case of qualitative methods. Teaching Sociology. 34 (3),

207-223.

Keith, B. & Ender, M. G. (2004). The sociological core: Conceptual Patterns and idiosyncrasies in the

structure and content of introductory sociology textbooks, 1940-2000. Teaching Sociology, 32 (1), 19-36.

Keith, B. & Ender, M. G. (2005). Search not for the core in the knowledge frontier: A reply to

Schweingruber. Teaching Sociology, 33 (1), 90-94.

Keyser, M. (2000). Active learning and co-operative learning: understanding the difference and using both

styles effectively. Research Strategies, 17 (1), 35-44.

Kernohan, D. & Rolfe, V. (2017). Opening Textbooks. WonkHE. Retrieved from:

http://wonkhe.com/blogs/textbooks-a-tipping-point/

Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling., New York: Guilford Press.

Kilburn, D. Nind, M. & Wiles, R. (2014). Learning as Researchers and Teachers: The Development of a

Pedagogical Culture for Social Science Research Methods? British Journal of Educational Studies. 62 (2),

191-207.

Koehler, M. & Mishra, P. (2009). What is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)?

Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9 (1), 60-70.

Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. California: SAGE.

Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2014). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. India: SAGE.

Lewthwaite, S. & Nind, M. (2016). Teaching research methods in the social sciences: expert perspectives

on pedagogy and practice. British Journal of Educational Studies. 64 (4), 413-430. DOI:

10.1080/00071005.2016.1197882.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. USA: SAGE.

Lofland, J., Snow, D., Anderson, L. & Lofland, L. H. (2004). Analyzing Social Settings: A guide to qualitative

observation and analysis. California: Wadsworth.

Lucas, B. & Claxton, G. (2013) Pedagogic Leadership: Creating Cultures and Practices for Outstanding

Vocational Learning (Winchester, 157 Group).

30

Martin-Martin, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Ayllon, J. M. & Delgado Lopez-Cozar, E. (2014), Does Google

Scholar contain all highly cited documents (1950-2013)? Granada: EC3 Working Papers, 19, 25th March

2015. Retrieved from: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1410/1410.8464.pdf

Mason, J. (2002/2017). Qualitative researching. London: SAGE.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook.

California: SAGE.

Morgan, S. L., & Winship, C. (2014). Counterfactuals and causal inference. Cambridge University Press. 2nd

Edition.

Nind, M., Curtin, A. & Hall, K. (2016). Research Methods for Pedagogy. London: Bloomsbury.

Nind, M., Kilburn, D. & Luff, R. (2015). The teaching and learning of social research methods:

developments in pedagogical knowledge. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 18 (5), 1-

9. DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2015.1062631

Nind, M. & Lewthwaite, S. (2018). Hard to teach: inclusive pedagogy in social science research methods

education. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 22 (1), 74-88, DOI:

10.1080/13603116.2017.1355413

Paxton, M. (2007). Tensions between textbook pedagogy and the literacy practices of the disciplinary

community: A study of writing in first year economics. Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 6 (2),

109-125.

Robson, C. & McCartan, C. (2015). Real World Research. London: Wiley.

Ryan, M., Saunders, C., Rainsford, E. and Thompson, E. (2014). Improving research methods teaching

and learning in politics and international relations: a ‘reality show’ approach. Politics, 34 (1), 85–97.

doi:10.1111/ponl.2014.34.issue-1.

Salkind, N. J. (2016). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics. California: SAGE.

Scott, J. (2017). Social network analysis. London: SAGE.

Shulman, L. S. (1984). Those Who Understand: Knowledge Grown in Teaching. Educational Researcher.

15 (2), 4-14.

Silver, C. & Lewins, A. (2014). Using Software in Qualitative Research. London: SAGE.

Silverman, D. (2015). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analyzing talk, text and interaction. London:

SAGE.

Schon, D. A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action (New York, Basic

Books).

Schweingruber, D. (2005). Comment on Keith and Ender, TS, January 2004: Looking for the Core in the

Wrong Place. Teaching Sociology. 33 (1), 81-89.

Schweingruber, D. & Wohlstein, R. T. (2005). The madding crowd goes to school: Myths about crowds in

introductory sociology textbooks. Teaching Sociology, 33 (2), 136-153.

Shraw, G. (2006) Knowledge: structures and processes. In P. A. Alexander and P. H. Winne (Eds)

Handbook of Educational Psychology. 2nd ed. Mahwa, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum. 245-254.

31

Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., & Osterlind, S. J. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Essex: Pearson

Education.

Tan, E. (2013) Informal learning on YouTube: exploring digital literacy in independent online learning.

Learning Media and Technology, 38(4), 463-477.

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and

qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. California: SAGE.

Wagner, C., Garner, M. and Kawulich, B. (2011). The state of the art of teaching research methods in the

social sciences: towards a pedagogical culture. Studies in Higher Education. 36 (1), 75–88. doi:

10.1080/03075070903452594

Yin, R. K. (2013/2018). Case study research: Design and methods. SAGE.

32